Talk:VL
The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Translingual entry.
Moved to RFV per request. --Hekaheka 22:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Discussion moved from RFD. --Hekaheka 22:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Translingual entry:
Quote from Wikipedia: Symbols are iterated to produce multiples of the decimal (1, 10, 100, 1000) values, with V, L, D substituted for a multiple of five, and the iteration continuing: I "1", II "2", III "3", V "5", VI "6", VII "7", etc., and the same for other bases: X "10", XX "20", XXX "30", L "50", LXXX "80"; CC "200", DCC "700", etc. At the fourth iteration, a subtractive principle may be employed, with the base placed before the higher base: IIII or IV "4", VIIII or IX "9", XXXX or XL "40", LXXXX or XC "90", CCCC or CD "400", DCCCC or CM "900". ... Note that the subtractive principle is not extended beyond the chart, and VL is not used for 45, which can only be forty (XL) and five (V), or XLV. --Hekaheka 04:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Since we try to be descriptive, what WP says doesn't really matter: this is an issue for RFV.—msh210℠ 18:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've added a cite (Darling) which is mention rather than use, but only in the sense that it's mentioning a band (music band) name that uses "45" in it because of the "VL" connection; thus, although the book cited is mentioning, the band name is, sort of, using. Not sure whether that counts. I've added another good cite (Sonneck), though it's quoting another source. And I've linked to a third cite, which is in Latin, so I don't know what parts of it to quote as meaningful in the quotation — but it's a cite of this term. So we have two (onw of which is not quoted on the citations page) and possibly a third (Darling).—msh210℠ 18:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've added one more cite. Like the Latin cite, I can't quote this one: this time, the language in question is Italian. This time, actually, I have a sneaking suspicion — not that I know any Italian — that it may be a mention. Not sure why I think so. These cites are all, by the way, on the cites page.—msh210℠ 03:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks to the work of Caladon and Barmar, the Latin and Italian cites are now nicely formatted and translated. Please have a look.—msh210℠ 14:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Passed.—msh210℠ 18:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)